Unsorted FBI Documents

Attachment to Independent Case Review Report
for CDRU # 967 Case File # 95-295395.

Material Examiner Malone fRQ)

Remarks :

After research it has been determined that the
dictation of Examiner Malone (RO) is
missing/incomplete from the case file at the time
of review bv the Independent Scientist.

CRM - 10955

INDEPENDENT CASE REVIEW REPORT

Independent Review conducted by: Steve Robertson

Area(s) of Expertise: Hair and Fiber

Review commenced at: 7:45 AM (Time), 09/15/99 (Date)

File U: 95-295395

Laboratory #{s): 01011032

Examiner(s) & Symbols

Reviewed

Not Reviewed

Reviewed

Not Reviewed

RQ

X

□ PR

□

X

wp

a

X

□

□

NC

□

X

□

a

Materials Reviewed

Trial testimony transcripts) of: Michael Malone

Testimony Date(s): Unknown Pages: 23

Laboratory Reports):

Laboratory Number:

01011032

Date: July 10, 1991

Laboratory Number

Date:

Laboratory Number:

Date:

Examiner Bench Notes of:

RQ and some unknown technicians

Laboratory Number:

01011032

Page ( of <■ '{

Initials

CRM - 10956

Was any other material reviewed? X Yes □ No

If yes, please identify and/or describe the material: Submitting agency letter dated Oct 5, 1990

Results of Review

File #: 95-295395 Item or Specimen # Reviewed: Q1 , Q5-Q33, Q36, Q39, Q40,

Q42-Q46, K1-K3

Review of Laboratory Report(s) and Bench Notes:

1) Did the examiner perform the appropriate tests in a scientifically acceptable manner, based on the
methods, protocols, and analytic techniques available at the time oLtfie original exammation(s)?

o Yes □ No fi^unable to Determine

2) Are the examination results set forth in the laboratory repots) supported and adequately documented in

the bench notes? □ Yes iV'No □ Unable to Determine

Review of Testimony:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on
additional pages for any "No" or "Unable to Determine" Responses

□

Transcript not available.

efYes

3)

Testimony consistent with the laboratory report(s)?

□ No

□ Unable

to Determine

4)

Testimony consistent with the bench notes?

a'Yes

y

□ No •

□ Unable

to Determine

5)

Testimony within bounds of examiner's expertise?

^res

□ No

□ Unable

to Determine

Page Z of

Initials:

Comments

(Set forth by above question #, if applicable.
Use "Additional Comments" Sheet, if needed)

File #: 95-295395

#1. There is insufficient documentation to determine if the hair comparisons were performed in a scientifically

acceptable manner.

U2. The notes do not adequately document the work performed. A 11 notes are in pencil, the date of the

examinations is not marked, there are some erasures and abbreviations are used that are difficult to

interpret None of the hair examined arc fully characterized as to their microscopic characteristics. The

examiner apparently compared the Q hair to the K hair without fully characterizing the individual

microscopic characteristics of any hair.

A Textile Fiber Comparison worksheet has the data from the examination of the rope fibers. This worksheet is

not dated or initialled.

Review completed at:

9 : 30 AM (Time),

91 15 / 99

(Date)

Total time spent conducting review (to nearest 1/4
hour):

/ % k

(fu/s

I hereby certify that I conducted this review in an independent, unbiased manner and that the rcsults of my review
are fully documented on this report consisting of a total of y pages.

(Signature)

(Date)

Page 3 of V'

Initials:

Additional Comments
(Set forth by question #, if applicable)

File#: 95-295395

The examiner chose to perform solubility testing on the rope fibers. Infrared analysis, available in the FBI Lab
at this time, is more specific and is the preferred method of identifying polymer composition of synthetic fibers.

Initials: